All these aspects are important in the final decision of the case. A jury simply must know all the aspects of someone's background to draw a final conclusion. And no, i'm not advocating profiling, but I am advocating common sense. If a muslim terrorist blows up a crowded train station at rush hour and kills 57 people, it would be rational to let the jury know about this so that in the future people would be more cautious around muslims, wouldn't it? Especially knowing that martyrdom are called for in the Koran, this is very important information to include.
A lot of recent cases in the USA can speak more than any argument. I recently saw that a homeless man tried to steal 50 dollars to buy something for himself (food, clothes, whatever) and the police caught him. He was sentenced to 7 years in prison for his crime.
Now compare that case with the recent case of fraud that prejudiced the state with over 200 million $ if I remember it right. Anyway, the CEO's of the company got a few months of public service and what's even worse is that they could keep their money in the end.
Comparing the 2 cases side by side it's hard to feel that justice was served the same for both of them.
I believe that the fact that the judge knew their race, gender and background biased them greatly.
Not all people are the same but everyone MUST be treated equal for justice to be done.